Hearing idiotic Americans claiming O'Bama is being positioned to be President because of the illuminati...and major players in the world control department...

He'll be guided to do whatever they hoped for...well, how come before the final candidates were picked they said the same thing of the other players??
Oh, when they get in they'll cater to the foreign market someone with money is putting 'them' in office-referring to other candidates who since dropped out..THEN another idiot claimed that Bush has had secret meetings with Hillary after hours or assigned hours to come to the White House to scout it out and get familiar with where she'll be sitting and residing....so..it MUST mean someone knows something others don't....WELL WHAT IS IT???

WAS BARACK PRE-CHOSEN???

Where are these conspiracy theorists going and let's get their names to OUT them when their prediction DOESN'T get in!!!(I love the revenge -just like those who said in 2000
all electronic hell would break loose and went on the radio and wrote books...now they ran back into the woodwork!)

Before it was Barack and Hillary and the meetings of the Dems took place, buzz was 'theorists' knew who was going to be in the finals and others claimed 'there was someone' they HOPED better not get the nomination or we'll all be controlled ...yet the theorists never hinted who they 'thought' would get in..they maybe didn't or they would've been screaming WE KNEW IT...but now they're saying O'Bama is part of the control group! 

Over 90% of the time, conspiracy theorists believes in everything they say to make themselves look smart while the rest is...eh :P

i actually think most of my esteemed conspiracy-theorizing colleagues are actually much more fixated on hillary clinton.

a lot of conspiracy theorists have a big big BIG soft spot for eisenhower and kennedy. and the obama following is a lot like the kennedy thing was, i think. he's got this whole handsome, dynamic, big-dream rhetoric thing going that really hearkens back to jfk. if anything the worry is that what happened to jfk could happen to bho particularly if he ends up getting protected by a secret service that hates him for stopping the war.

O'Bama

Holy sh!t, he's Irish!!!  :o

Holy sh!t, he's Irish!!!  :o


Yeah, his real name is Seamus O'Bama, and his family hails from County Cork. :P

Holy sh!t, he's Irish!!!  :o


I thought he was Superman reincarnated.

http://i128.photobucket.com/albums/p177/Robertselby/obama_as_superman.jpg

Camera doesn't lie. :)

Ah, Barack-El!

I thought he was Superman reincarnated.

http://i128.photobucket.com/albums/p177/Robertselby/obama_as_superman.jpg

Camera doesn't lie. :)
YEAH BABY!

i knew there was a reason i liked this guy! 8)

YEAH BABY!

i knew there was a reason i liked this guy! 8)


Therefore it's not a conspiracy, they're just jealous of his super powers.

obama fever!

CATCH IT!

i think i'm gonna donate some money. right the eff now, by golem.

Therefore it's not a conspiracy, they're just jealous of his super powers.


The power of...CHANGE!

The power of...CHANGE!
i just gave him a hundred bucks. use it wisely my man. 8)

The power of...CHANGE!


Yep, even a few Republicans are down with that. 8)

Speaking of superpowers, Obama won Mississippi.  And it sounds like he won Texas overall too.

Speaking of superpowers, Obama won Mississippi.  And it sounds like he won Texas overall too.


Hillary was sooo sure she had Texas.  Mississippi was a sure bet for Obama.

Hillary was sooo sure she had Texas.  Mississippi was a sure bet for Obama.


Yah, but it sounds like the Dems are going to do their damnedest to seat the delegates from Michigan and Florida...Obama might be screwed :(

Yah, but it sounds like the Dems are going to do their damnedest to seat the delegates from Michigan and Florida...Obama might be screwed :(


I heard.  It looks like PA may not be for Hillary as much as projected.  Let's hope he win it.  BTW Hillary was campaigning in PA today, had to turn off the local news. 8-P

Yah, but it sounds like the Dems are going to do their damnedest to seat the delegates from Michigan and Florida...Obama might be screwed :(
he'll be fine. i made a contribution, and witch mountain money is way better than regular money. i can prove it using algebra. from here on in, obama's feet will be floating off the ground and he's gonna be working the super-delegates the way yoda works a light sabre. he's runnin' on tiabucks! be watching when BHO forcechokes hill on CNN, it will not be for the faint of heart. :o

"I find your lack of faith...disturbing..."

"I find your lack of faith...disturbing..."
it's a right purdy mental image, aint it? 8)

Holy sh!t, he's Irish!!!  :o


It's MARCH MADNESS SETTING IN! (And to throw off the other country leaders)....
may have been brought up before butif Hil. wins do you think the backwards country will actually want to sit in the same room if she talks?



THIS JUST IN..SHE'S MAKING MRS. SPITZER HER RUNNING MATE!! :D

he'll be fine. i made a contribution, and witch mountain money is way better than regular money. i can prove it using algebra. from here on in, obama's feet will be floating off the ground and he's gonna be working the super-delegates the way yoda works a light sabre. he's runnin' on tiabucks! be watching when BHO forcechokes hill on CNN, it will not be for the faint of heart. :o


  Sounds better than Bongo Bucks...

  Maybe if I'd have kept the tiabucks economy I could've passed social sciences in HS... :P

Of course Barack was pre-chosen. The illuminati wants a one world government. Who better to lead the world into one than a man of medium-brown colour. An even mix of all the colours of the world. He's african-american but he almost looks middle eastern and he's light enough for white people to like him. His perfect for the job.

Of course Barack was pre-chosen. The illuminati wants a one world government. Who better to lead the world into one than a man of medium-brown colour. An even mix of all the colours of the world. He's african-american but he almost looks middle eastern and he's light enough for white people to like him. His perfect for the job.
wow. i have no idea what to do with this. :o if the illuminati were picking people of indeterminate race for office in order to grease the gears of one-world government how come they've been picking lilly-white largely uberrepublican dudes up til now? and if the one-world government were so concerned with mollifying the racists how come there's been such a resurgence of far-right nationalist movements in europe in the wake of the NWO-inspired European Union?

if i had to pick a parapolitical theory i think it would have less to do with one-world government. although that idea DOES frighten me, i just think it's further off than most people think; the republicans in the US have been all about stirring hyper-nationalist sentiments, not so much entraining us to accept the "Amero." i'm big on the "fatten the pig-slaughter the pig" theory where the democrats raise revenues, stabilize the economy, and bring down deficits and then the republicans come in and engage in flagrant profiteering and fiscal recklessness, run the economy to the verge of collapse, and then let a dem come in and fix it again, and then the cycle repeats.

Of course Barack was pre-chosen. The illuminati wants a one world government. Who better to lead the world into one than a man of medium-brown colour. An even mix of all the colours of the world. He's african-american but he almost looks middle eastern and he's light enough for white people to like him. His perfect for the job.



http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o283/Nerdprincess1980/LOLcats/funny-pictures-sideways-smiling-cat.jpg

He's african-american but he almost looks middle eastern and he's light enough for white people to like him. His perfect for the job.



I say he is caucasian american, but he almost looks middle eastern, and he's dark enough for non-whites and african-americans to like him.  He is perfect for the job.

I say he is caucasian american, but he almost looks middle eastern, and he's dark enough for non-whites and african-americans to like him.  He is perfect for the job.



I don't think he is perfect for the job because of his skin color. I think he is perfect for the job because of the content of his character.  ;)



Cat

The content of his character makes him perfect for the job of leading the world in the a NWO?

I don't think he is perfect for the job because of his skin color. I think he is perfect for the job because of the content of his character.  ;)



Cat


I was tongue in cheeking Zosos' post.  My opinion is the same as yours  ;)

http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/ap/20080319/capt.305eb4cec8534da09426a1dd5ad1a624.bush_whgh101.jpg?x=292&y=345&sig=XWgkRNjmYczpccJazFrUXA--

http://englishatheist.org/images/notjesus.jpg

they did it again. ::) guess they gotta find SOME way of selling that little turd of a "president." ::) ::)

The content of his character makes him perfect for the job of leading the world in the a NWO?


  Ha!  The anti-Christ would like a word with you... :P



if i had to pick a parapolitical theory i think it would have less to do with one-world government. although that idea DOES frighten me, i just think it's further off than most people think; the republicans in the US have been all about stirring hyper-nationalist sentiments, not so much entraining us to accept the "Amero." i'm big on the "fatten the pig-slaughter the pig" theory where the democrats raise revenues, stabilize the economy, and bring down deficits and then the republicans come in and engage in flagrant profiteering and fiscal recklessness, run the economy to the verge of collapse, and then let a dem come in and fix it again, and then the cycle repeats.



  Policy-wise, I wonder (just brainstorming) how much a president can really do, anymore?  Whether congress goes "R", stays "D", or gets mixed, I just don’t see it being more effective, and that’s really where things get done.  A president has the power to suggest and market policies and strategies, and is tasked with implementing them if approved, sanctioned and funded by congress...

  Every president gets three things:
    1) a natural disaster
    2) an economic crisis
    3) military action

  There’s nothing a pres can really do to prevent a natural disaster, and when a Mississippi flood comes around, or 4 hurricanes hit Florida in one year, or a Katrina, it’s barely 1/3 of the president’s responsibility to provide aid because local and state officials are the primary and secondary sources of emergency response...

  When an economic crisis occurs, the pres can do a few tweaks here and there but mostly, I think, it falls to congress’ taxing...

  America’s Achilles heel is asymmetric warfare, and in that kind of war the enemy seeks to impose its political will by convincing the opposing population to surrender their will to the enemy.  In other words America’s enemies target our anti-war sentiments and those sentiments rest on the left (a portion of the political spectrum that has felt grossly alienated, even oppressed), and I don’t think the anti-war left (is there anti-war right?) will support any conflict unless a Dem markets it...

 

  America’s Achilles heel is asymmetric warfare, and in that kind of war the enemy seeks to impose its political will by convincing the opposing population to surrender their will to the enemy.  In other words America’s enemies target our anti-war sentiments and those sentiments rest on the left (a portion of the political spectrum that has felt grossly alienated, even oppressed), and I don’t think the anti-war left (is there anti-war right?) will support any conflict unless a Dem markets it...


Two nitpicks:

The minor nitpick:  There was an antiwar right -- look at how the 'pubs opposed the Kosovo conflict.  Entirely politically-motivated; the war was started by the other team's guy, and therefore had to be opposed.  (Rather like the Dems' opposition of the current Admin's expansion of executive power -- put on a big show for the party faithful, do nothing in Congress but wait until it's their turn to take advantage of it...)

The major nitpick:  The targeting of antiwar-left sentiment was a fixture of the Cold War, which was not an asymmetric war.  For example, the Soviets infiltration and influence of many domestic groups who argued for the unilateral disarmament of the West from the 50s through the 80s. 

Asymmetric warfare is more akin to aikido; you don't need to have a massive infiltration effort like the KGB did.  Instead, you invest a small amount of resource, and use your opponent's natural tendencies (in Aikido, usually his weight or bodily inertia from a wild swing he takes against you) against him. 

"I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The U.S. government will lead the American people in -- and the West in general -- into an unbearable hell and a choking life."
        - Some Dirtball in Afghanistan, October 21, 2001.

The most fascinating thing about asymmetrical warfare is that you can tell your opponent exactly what your strategy is, and your opponent will still go right ahead and play into your hands. 

Asymmetric warfare isn't when terrorists spend $1M to con 19 farktards to blow up a $1B worth of real estate.

Asymmetric warfare is when terrorists can spend $1M... and get the opposing government to blow $100B/year (and yeah, I'm lowballing it) convincing its own citizens that The Terrorists Have Won.

Every time we pick up the phone or post to a message board and remember that our government is keeping a score on our loyalty based on the number of naughty words we say, and that if your score gets too low, we can't fly anymore.  Every time we take off our shoes and hand over our water bottles at a TSA checkpoint.  Every time we say "Security theater has made flying suck so hard these days that I'd rather just pay $4.00/gallon and drive the 500 miles instead".  Every time we read about a new torture camp.  Every time we see news footage of "the man on the street" saying things "It's for the Children", "If it saves just one person", "What if it was your children in danger?", "They're just trying to keep us safe", "Papers, please!", "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear!" and not get accused of being some kind of Commie nut.  Every time we think of "pre-9/11 America" and "post-9/11 America" as two nations that operated under two different legal theories, one of which has ceased to exist. 

$100B/year works out to about $200,000/second, and that's what asymmetrical warfare is all about.  The bad guys are getting a full return on their $1M investment every five seconds, they've been getting it for more than six years, and there's no sign of it ever stopping.

  Ah ha..!

  I've heard that exact theory floated before a couple of years ago (by someone I was talking to @ work, actually) - the insurgents' (or their handlers') aim to spend us to death.  Hit us in our exposed economy.  Forget about a mounting death toll, hit 'em in their pocketbooks...

  Makes sense...

  I've heard that exact theory floated before a couple of years ago (by someone I was talking to @ work, actually) - the insurgents' (or their handlers') aim to spend us to death.  Hit us in our exposed economy.  Forget about a mounting death toll, hit 'em in their pocketbooks...


On a much larger scale, it's been argued that it's how we beat the Soviets during Cold War I.  How many rubles did they spend on the MiG-25, to counter the XB-70 Valkyrie... which we then cancelled, leaving them with a sweet -- but inefficient against a B-1B -- interceptor?  Then we did the same thing with Star Wars.  Sure, they could have overwhelmed the ABM defenses by lobbing more missiles or clever use of MIRVs, but they didn't know that at the time, and their economy was on the brink to begin with."

(Anyone who believes the opposite on ABM, that's fine -- just imagine the Russians succesfully duping us into spending billions on missile defense that wouldn't work! :)

In (traditional) economic warfare, each move (typically a defensive/offensive system) typically has a 10:1 multiplier effect.  For every $1 one side spent on XYZ, the other side had to spend $10 on anti-XYZ.

In asymmetric warfare, the bad guys are aiming for 1,000,000:1 multipliers or more.  How many millions of man-hours of lost productivity and panic did the DC snipers cost?  Two guys in a pickup truck caused panic across three states for months. 

How many billions of man-hours of productivity has been wasted seizing and destroying bottles of water and toothpaste at TSA checkpoints?  Probably more than would have been lost if we'd just let the bad guys blow up a plane or two every year.  Airplanes crash every few months with all hands lost -- the economic costs of 9/11 were because they managed to wreck a couple of very expensive buildings full of very important people, and that risk was effectively eliminated as soon as the cockpit doors were secured.

There's a reason why the shoe bomber had that bomb in his shoe and not up his arse.  If it had been up his arse, even we American sheeple would have drawn the line at mandatory rubber-gloved anal probing as the price of flying.